On the Friday edition of The O'Reilly Factor's "Talking Points Memo" segment, self-proclaimed satirical journalist/host Bill O'Reilly used a year-old clip from Comedy Central's The Daily Show in an attempt to make it look as though "Secular Central" (as he referred to them) were out to get Christmas!

The latest chapter in O'Reilly's phony "War on Christmas" or whatever the hell he calls his sad cry for attention --- and/or swell reason to avoid reporting on actual news --- provides more ammunition to the argument that the Fox "News" Channel's #1 personality continues his bizarre slide into bonkerhood/irrelevancy.

Previously, the so-called "Christian" Right had decried the commercialization of Christmas, but having apparently found that tactic not as politically adventageous as they might might have liked, have this year declared "war" on whatever retail outlets don't remind shoppers of their latest reason for the season: The Commercialization of Jesus Christ as a Weapon in a Self-Induced Paranoia-laden Phony Culture War (or, as Tom Delay's one-time aide, the now-indicted Michael Scanlon described it via email: a way to fire up the "Christian wackos" to trick them into voting for Republicans).

O'Reilly introduced a video clip from The Daily Showduring Friday's "Talking Points Segment" by saying "Predictably, the opponents of public displays of Christmas continue to put forth counter arguments." He then referred to Comedy Central as "Secular Central."

Trouble is, the clip appears to be from last year'sDaily Show as evidenced by a) We watched every episode this week and didn't see the clip O'Reilly played, b) Daily Show "correspondent" Samantha Bee is standing in front of a 2004 calendar and c) Bee is currently quite noticably pregnant...which she is noticabaly NOT in the clip O'Reilly used.

UPDATE: 12/6/05Media Matters picks up on our story. ... A few details added: O'Reilly also played the Samantha Bee clip on the same afternoon's Radio Factor and referred to it as "what happenened there last night" (he dropped the "last night" part when misleading viewers later that evening on his TV show). They also cut the first part of Bee's comment from the TV version, but played it on the radio where she began the joke by saying, "But really, let's face it. All other days bow down to the 25th..."

In related news, O'Reilly and the other GOP shamelessly opportunistic Political Paranoia Peddlers featured stories about the Jewish Rightwing wackos who are also jumping on the Chutzpa Wagon to publicize their own mock outrage about this non-issue.

Former Boston Herald editorial writer and O'Reilly Factor guest Don Feder, tossed his tallis into the hat to try and help trump up O'Reilly's phony pet-project du jour by giving statements to the Cybercast News Service (CNS) on Friday. The statements were given by Feder to CNS --- a Republican propaganda organization created by GOP operative Brent Bozell and edited by Scott Hogenson, a long time director of operations in the RNC Press Office --- under the guise of heading up a Jewish group claiming to be supporting the effort to "save Christmas." In one of his statements, Feder, who is apparently Jewish, is quoted by CNS as stating that "America is a Christian nation."

Feder, a hard-right political consultant, bomb-thrower and smear-merchant (the kind O'Reilly pretends to not like) and the President of a group calling itself "Jews Against Anti-Christian Defamation" (JAACD) goes on to inflate his and O'Reilly's own strawman "war" by saying "we think it's good for Christians to be able to celebrate their holiday." As if any American had ever suggested otherwise.

The JAACD, which announced their mission to "Wage Web Warfare Against The Liberal Establishment" on its website, was formed last April. Jewish comedian Jackie Mason, who is also on the board of JAACD, was provided to O'Reilly's show as a guest on Friday. One of the other Republican propaganda "news" services, NewsMax.com ran a similar article in lockstep with their comrades at CNS on that same day. No mention was given in either article about Feder's relationship with O'Reilly.

Incidentally, no mention is given that "America is a Christian nation" in either the U.S. Constitution or the Declaration of Independence declaring America's nationhood.

CNS, NewsMax and O'Reilly have similarly forgotten to mention that as their shameless anti-American crusade for the hearts and minds --- and votes --- of the Rightwing Christian "wackos" continues.

(ADDENDUM: For those unfamiliar with all of this nonsense, see Bob Cesca's hilarious piece at HuffPo which also discusses Crooks & Liars discovery of O'Reilly's own Fox store offering "Holiday Ornaments" for your "Holiday Tree". Since John Amato reported that at C&L, by the way, Fox's store has been ethnically cleansed of the offensive balls, which several of their shows had offered, in favor of biblically accurate "Christmas" balls instead.)

UPDATE:Judging a man by the company he keeps... More on the hate-mongering, possibly psychopathic and self-discrediting Don Feder follows...

MSNBC picks up on Ann Coulter's pathetically infantile attack on BRAD BLOG Guest Blogger Lydia Cornell by naming Coulter in their "Worst Person in the World" segment Friday. She receives this dubious honor for "posting the personal phone number and email of a blogger who was critical of her" and for otherwise referring to to groups who disagree with her as "Nazi block watchers."

Indeed it's been nearly a full week since the cowardly hate-mongering "satirist" Coulter posted Cornell's private information on the front page of her website in petulant retaliation for an article Cornell wrote here on BRAD BLOG. Coulter has refused to take it down despite Cornell's polite requests to do so. The Ivy League educated Republican mouthpiece also regaled her readers by adding "Death is sexier than Lydia Cornell" to a post which included a polite private email from the actress/author.

In the bargain Cornell and her family continue to receive harassment and threats via her personal email and phone number which Coulter supplied to her millions of her uncompassionate attack dog sycophants who (predictably) refuse to condemn Coulter's indefensable lapse of simple "netiquette" and common decency. They --- like so many of their fake "conservative" brethren --- would rather attack someone whose message they don't like, rather than condemn one of their own or force them to take person responsibility for abhorrent behavior. Clearly these folks recognize neither "compassion" nor "conservatism" as anything other than a blunt linguistic instrument with which they are to bludgeon their perceived American "enemies".

Please help support The BRAD BLOG! Unlike MSNBC, we're just one guy and a few tireless volunteers helping out when they can. Your donations mean the world...and help make it possible to continue our work 24/7!

Ann Coulter was called out on Countdown's nightly "Worst Person in the World" segment for posting the personal information of one of her critics on her website. They also noted that she referred to liberals as "Nazi block watchers" on Fox's O'Reilly Factor

Today we have a hodge-podge of news items. It seems that most of the news makers of the last few days are having a snooze and getting ready for the next flurry of excitement. Today we have a report from Texas were there is concern about a contract they have with Accenture (you may remember them as Arthur Anderson Consulting and their work with Enron) now that Colorado has just canceled a voter data base contract with them. In Ohio a judge has denied a request by attorneys for Gov. Taft and SoS Blackwell to dismiss a lawsuit against them by the state LWV....

On Wednesday, President Bush gave a speech at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis to unveil an unclassified version of something called the "National Strategy for Victory in Iraq".

As Maureen Dowd notes in today's NY Times, the Bush Administration's recently released plan is not a plan for victory as much as badly crafted political talking points. We wonder if the victory that Mr. Bush is planning for has more to do with the 2006 elections than achieving stability in Iraq.

Mr. Bush asserts that progress is being made in Iraq but his facts don't stand up to the truth on the ground. One of the most glaring discrepancies is Bush's claim that Iraqi troops lead the recent assault on Tal Afar. The Time Magazine reporter, Michael Ware, who was embedded with Iraqi troops in the Tal Afar battle has a different story:

I was in that battle from the very beginning to the very end. I was with Iraqi units right there on the front line as they were battling with al Qaeda. They were not leading. They were being led by the U.S. green beret special forces with them.

While the Bush team is flailing to find decent talking points, the Democrats can't seem to agree on any plan for resolution of the Iraq war crisis. By the end of this week the Democrats were holding at least three different positions:

Lieberman - Let 'em die. Whatever Bush says is OK with me.

Hillary - Let 'em die for another year or so. Maybe I'll change my mind after a few more polls.

Murtha - Bring 'em home as soon as practicable (6 months or less).

We've complied some video clips highlighting this week's developments in the politics of Iraq. From Bush's misleading speech to the Democrats fractured positions, it seems that most politicians are more concerned with their political futures than the futures of 150,000 men and women who have become living targets in an un-justified and un-winnable war.

Debra Bowen, author of the "Bowen Amendment" (SB 370) which mandated "paper trails" for all votes in California, is now running for Secretary of State out here. She blogs about the now-nearly-infamous "Hack Test" that may soon occur on Diebold machines here in California.

She also asks that you sign her email petition demanding current Sec. of State Bruce McPherson thoroughly test such machines before they are certified by the state. I ask you to do so as well!

You don't need to be in California to sign the petition, as far as I know. And since what happens here will soon happen there, I strongly recommend you sign it.

(I recommend this because it's important, not just because she called me her "hero" during a joint appearance earlier today on KRXA 540am. Though that didn't hurt!

Just a minor factual error in your post about SB 370 (Bowen) last week. The bill doesn't require voting machines to have paper trails ľ another lawmaker did that in 2004 and it will take effect on 1/1/06. What SB 370 did do is to require elections officials to use those paper trails to conduct the 1% manual hand count required by California law to audit the results of the election ľ and in the case of any recount. If there's a dispute, then the results from the paper ballots are used as the official vote count.

Hope that makes sense.

It does indeed, and my thanks to Bowen's office for sending over the clarification!

In a stunning reversal the North Carolina State Board of Elections decided to ignore state law and certify three voting systems for use in the state. Keith Long, an advisor to the Board of Elections who was formerly employed by both Diebold and Sequoia, has said that "none of them" could meet the statutory requirement to place their system code in escrow. Instead of rejecting all applications and issuing a new call for bids as required by law, the Board chose to approve all of the applicants. Long also said that it was not necessary to review the source code, even though state law requires it, because the ITA has already done that before federal qualification....

Washington Post, in a stunning front page splash today, is reporting that political appointees in George W. Bush's Dept. of Justice overruled their own attorneys in the Voting Rights Act unit who had recommended against Texas' state redistricting plan for Congressional districts. That new redistricting plan was key to former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's (R-TX) controversial strategy in the state which eventually resulted in 7 additional Republicans being elected to the U.S. House in 2004.

Eight staffers at the DoJ, including the heads of the Voting Rights Division, advocated against the redistricting in a 73-page memo, but Bush political appointees agreed to allow the changes to go through anyway! The Voting Rights Act requires DoJ pre-approval of changes to electoral law in several states where minority voting rights have historically been an issue.

According to WaPo, "The Justice Department memo recommending rejection of the Texas plan was written by two analysts and five lawyers. In addition, the head of the voting section at the time, Joseph Rich, wrote a concurring opinion."

The disturbing revelation is similar to one reported two weeks ago, based on another yet leaked memo reported by WaPo's Dan Eggen, in which the Bush Attorney General is shown to have overruled 4 of 5 staffers who had recommended against pre-approval of Georgia's new Photo ID requirement at the polls. That law has since been struck down by Federal Courts which described it as a "Jim Crow-era Poll Tax."

The Bush administration has made a mockery of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 which celebrated its 40th anniversary over the summer. Several key clauses of the Voting Rights Act will be coming up for renewal authorization by Congress in 2007. It was reported some time ago that George W. Bush was "not familiar" with the VRA when asked about his support for its renewal during a meeting with several minority legislators in the summer prior to the 2004 election.

In 2003, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), the ranking member of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, had requested review of the documents now revealed by WaPo. He was met with "a cold response" at the time from the DoJ according to a just-issued press release (posted in full below). He is now calling for a full investigation by the Judiciary Committee into both the Texas and Georgia matters.

The following is from an AP summary of the WaPo's report [emphasis added]:

A Justice Department memo released Friday showed that agency staffers unanimously objected to the Texas plan, which DeLay pushed through the Legislature to help elect more Republicans to the U.S. House.

Senior agency officials, appointed by President Bush, brushed aside concerns about the possible impact on minority voting and approved the new districts for the 2004 elections.
...
Of the state's 32 House seats, Republicans held 15 before the 2004 elections. Under the DeLay-backed plan, Republicans were elected to 22 of the state's seats in the House.
...
Because of historic discrimination against minority voters, Texas is required under provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to get Justice Department approval for any voting changes it makes to ensure the changes don't undercut minority voting.
...Eight department staffers, including the heads of the Voting Rights Division, objected to the redistricting map, according to the memo which was first reported in Friday editions of The Washington Post.

[Gerry] Hebert [, who has been challenging the ruling] said when a case is a close call staff lawyers usually include counterpoints to their conclusions in their memo. But he said there is nothing in the 73-page memo suggesting a plausible reason for approving the map. "So that raises a lot of suspicions about the motives" of the senior officials who are political appointees, he said.
...
"The fact that the White House has covered up this document for so long provides a smoking gun pointing out efforts, led by Bush political appointees and Tom DeLay, to systematically cripple the voting rights of minorities," said Texas Sen. Leticia Van De Putte, one of the Democratic lawmakers who fled to New Mexico to thwart passage of the redistricting plan.

The WaPo report adds:

Mark Posner, a longtime Justice Department lawyer who now teaches law at American University, said it was "highly unusual" for political appointees to overrule a unanimous finding such as the one in the Texas case.

"In this kind of situation, where everybody agrees at least on the staff level . . . that is a very, very strong case," Posner said. "The fact that everybody agreed that there were reductions in minority voting strength, and that they were significant, raises a lot of questions as to why it was" approved, he said.

In an almost expected turn of events Diebold was certified to be used in North Carolina today. This happened without meeting state code that requires inspection, for security purposes, of their source code. Essentially they lost in court because they were told they could not get a waiver from state law so the state gave them the waiver anyway and they are attempting to get away with this by making the same offer to other vendors....

Surprise! Diebold got certified in North Carolina today. In what the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is calling the "Immaculate Certification" the North Carolina State Board of Elections has decided to certify Diebold. This is the same Diebold that three days ago said that they would have to pull out of consideration in the state because they were not willing to put their buggy software source code from their flawed Voting Machines into escrow claiming they had third-party software that could not be submitted to the state. This is the same Diebold that, as BRAD BLOG correctly surmised, were apparently making faux claims about their need to pull out of NC due to a court's refusal to allow them exemption from that state law. But what else is new for a company like Diebold?

Despite Diebold's asserted inability to meet the requirements of state law, the North Carolina Board of Elections today happily certified Diebold without condition. Never mind all of that third party software. Never mind the impossibility of obtaining a list of programmers who had contributed to that code.

And never mind the Board of Election's obligation to subject all candidate voting system to rigorous review before certification, [as per the law which says]:

"Prior to certifying a voting system, the State Board of Elections shall review, or designate an independent expert to review, all source code made available by the vendor pursuant to this section and certify only those voting systems compliant with State and federal law. At a minimum, the State Board's review shall include a review of security, application vulnerability, application code, wireless security, security policy and processes, security/privacy program management, technology infrastructure and security controls, security organization and governance, and operational effectiveness, as applicable to that voting system."

One computer savvy voting activist with North Carolina Verifiable Voting has pointed out correctly that the Board of Elections now has another rather obvious problem. The statute requires the Board of Elections to review all of the code used in vendors' proposed system before certification. Either they ignored this part of the code or they have some super code and security experts in hiding somewhere.

At the superior court hearing on Monday, the state Attorney General said that she couldn't imagine that the Board of Elections would certify a system that didn't meet all of the requirements of the statute. Well, they did and now she must defend them.

And who made the decision to go ahead and ignore the code and certify Diebold? A gentleman by the name of Keith Long was hired to be in charge of the process for the state. And what are Mr. Long's credentials to handle this job? Mr. Long was one of the Diebold representatives responsible for previously selling the Diebold voting system to the state of Georgia.

RAW STORY's Miriam Raftery opens up on the scam apparently being perpetuated by California Sec. of State Bruce McPherson in what appears to be a last-minute effort to quickly re-certify Diebold's TSx touch-screen voting machines in California as the Jan 1, 2006 deadline for the Help America Vote Act looms.

A recent "Voting Systems Testing Summit" convened last week by McPherson in Sacramento appears to have been purposely rigged by the SoS's office to tilt strongly towards the presentation of information that supports the return of Diebold's buggy and unsecured voting machines to the state.

As reported by Raftery...

"This smacks of Dick Cheney meeting with the energy companies and locking out opposing interests of environmental groups," Sherry Healy, a member of the California Election Protection Network steering committee, told RAW STORY. "Diebold and other vendors selling electronic voting equipment have been invited to attend, along with all 400 members of the California Association of Election Officials," she said. "It costs one hundred and seventy five dollars a ticket and will be picked up by the state."

A massive public test of the machines held over the summer by Republican McPherson revealed that 20% of the Diebold machines had failed to perform properly (RAW STORY lists the number as 30%). But a subsequent test held privately, using machines specially prepared by Diebold gave only a reported 3% error rate.

Amonst the nuggets uncovered in Raftery's report is this information from Diebold spokesperson, David Bear:

In an interview Monday with RAW STORY, Diebold spokesman David Bear revealed, California's "recommendation is to certify the equipment as reviewed." Bear said McPherson's staff made a recommendation to recertify the Diebold TSX system before hearing public testimony, based on a review of the new test results.

Bear had recently lied in an interview with The BRAD BLOG when he at first claimed that Diebold's Central Vote Tabulator "isn't accessable via modem." When pressed further, he was later forced to admit that it was. He also claimed to be unaware of a "Cyber Security Alert" issued by a branch of the US Dept. of Homeland Security prior to last year's Presidential Election warning about the security vulnerability in Diebold's tabulation software.

Raftery outlines the overwhelming imbalance of the assembled panelist for the event last week where Voting Rights and Election Reform activists were largely shut out. That, despite a conversation The BRAD BLOG had just last Monday live on air with a spokesperson from the SoS office who had denied the allegation. The full audio and text transcript of that live on-air interview on KRXA 540am in Montery, CA is posted here.

Raftery found much evidence suggesting the heavily weighted pro-Electronic Voting factions and the apparent lock-out of Election Reform and Voting Rights advocates at the summit. For example, Raftery reports on several of the panelists who were allowed to attend and speak on the matter:

[Dr. Brit] Williams has been an outspoken defender of electronic voting. As a NIST [National Institute for Standards and Techology] participant, he stated that "adding a paper 'receipt' could have an adverse effect." He also served as a state evaluator of Diebold machines in Georgia, where he allowed installation of a patch not certified by testing labs...Williams later admitted, "Some of the things we did, we probably compromised security a little bit."

And more like the above:

[Donnetta] Davidson is a commission on the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC). As Secretary of State in Colorado, she faced embarrassment over her leadership in the Elections Center, a nonpartisan state office that accepted donations from e-voting companies at the same time that it touted their machinery.

Meanwhile, reformers and activists from California Elections Protection Network (CEPN), for example, were entirely shut out from even attending --- much less presenting! --- at the summit:

When several members of CEPN applied for admission, they were denied - despite the fact that the event was not yet full. Correspondence from the Secretary of State's office denying the request has been posted at the CEPN website.

"We offered to pay a fee," Healy said of the invitation-only event. "They assured us that our views are being represented."

But after reviewing a list of attendees, CEPN found no activists and only three computer experts with views compatible with CEPN's election reform goals. "Panels are stacked so as to be heavily pro-Diebold," Healy noted. "Our side is heavily outnumbered."

The letter referred to above, from the SoS's office, as posted on the CEPN website says:

Thank you for your interest in the Summit on voting system testing. We invited elections officials from across the country to participate, since this is a Summit designed specifically to discuss state-level testing of voting machines and to develop a best practices document on that specific subject. We've had a very good response; registrations are filling up fast so we are having to limit attendance to those already invited. The panels and panelists reflect the widest array of credible views, from outright skeptics to industry. Interested parties are encouraged to contribute written documents to the Summit to be reviewed as part of the final recommendations for testing to the states. They should send their written input to VotingSystemComment@ss.ca.gov.

States and counties around the country are keeping a close eye on the decision soon to be made by California which is, as Diebold regards it, the country's largest "voting market." What happens in this state, may well effect the decisions made by countless Boards of Elections around the country as they all face the impending deadline to receive federal funding for upgrades to their election systems.

Good lord is this woman a whack-job or what? From the BBC coverage of an upcoming interview with Judith Miller. Her "apologies" for helping lead the drumbeat that resulted in an endless war and thousands dead and wounded for life:

She said: "I'm deeply sorry our intelligence community got it wrong.

"I am deeply sorry that the President was given a national intelligence estimate which concluded that Saddam Hussein had biological and chemical weapons and a active weapons programme."

I'm deeply sorry the NY Times decided to destroy their own once-great reputation by giving this loon a paycheck. Ever.

And if the above is not pitiable enough, she reportedly admits that Scooter Libby was one of her sources for the Plame leak (didn't she tell us previously she couldn't remember who told her?) but when asked if Karl Rove was also a source, she tells BBC:

"I can't talk about the specifics of this case as I might be a witness in a criminal trial."

Huh? I'm no legal eagle, but is there some kind of law that prevents a witness to a crime from telling the press what they know about the crime?

Does this woman think that an interview she gives to the BBC won't make it aaaall the way back here across the pond?

She lost her job, and now --- it seems --- she's lost her mind. Or did that happen in the reverse order? Good lord...

It's been three days since Coulter posted a personal email address and phone number of author and actress Lydia Cornell on the front page of her website. The petulant act by the Republican talking head was in apparent retaliation for an article written for BRAD BLOG by Cornell which described her experience in trying to track down a copy of a fundraiser address Coulter had given recently for the Alachua Florida Republican Party in which she called for the repression of free speech by Democrats.

Cornell has received myriad threatening emails and crank callers in the three days since Coulter posted her private information online. She has asked Coulter to remove it and Coulter has so far refused.

In support of Coulter's invasion of Cornell's privacy, Guckert/Gannon, a shill who had worked in the White House for GOPNews.com until his secret background as a prostitute was exposed, attempted to defend the Rightwing polemicist yesterday on his website by claiming:

Funny, these same folks didn't have any problems publishing my phone number, home address, Social Security number and medical records online...

Gannon/Guckert presented no evidence to back up his assertion. His reported presence at the White House more than two dozen times when no press briefings were scheduled --- as described in Secret Service documents obtained by RAW STORY --- has never been explained. Gannon/Guckert had no previous journalistic experience before being granted access as journalist to the White House.

Of course, The BRAD BLOG has never posted any such information, as claimed by Guckert/Gannon, but we checked in today with John Aravosis who was instrumental in uncovering the Guckert/Gannon scandal when it first appeared on his AMERICAblog website. He was the first to post links to Gannon's several military-themed gay escort websites (including MilitaryStud.com and MaleCorps.com) featuring full frontal nude photos which Guckert/Gannon had posted of himself online.

Aravosis, who followed the story as close as anybody, tells The BRAD BLOG that he's unfamiliar with anybody having ever published Gannon/Guckert's phone number, home address or medical records anywhere on line. Though he says that when he was alerted to a commenter at AMERICAblog having posted what appeared to be Gannon/Guckert's Social Security number in the comments section, he removed it immediately.

Aravosis strongly disagreed with Gannon/Guckert's claim. "We never knew where he lived. We still don't!" Aravosis told us. "We never had his phone number. Nobody did as far as I know. All the top journalists that I know of had to contact him by email since he never gave his phone number to anybody!"

"As to his medical records," he continued, "The only records we tried to find was his military records because he said he was a marine...and it turned out he was lying!"

Aravosis draws the difference between his work uncovering a phony journalist in the White House being "outed" by his own online websites featuring his own nude photos with what Coulter has done to Cornell.

"It's kind of creepy," he said, "posting someone's personal phone number. When I saw his Social Security number come up in comments, I deleted it immediately. But Coulter is purposely posting that information herself on her own website. I've never used anybody's home information...that's just creepy."

On her website today, Coulter claims she will be appearing tonight on Bill O'Reilly's The O'Reilly Factor.

As Cornell pointed out in her initial public response to all of this, O'Reilly had slammed the Media Matters watchdog organization when he claimed they "violated privacy" by posting someone's email address online. Though the email address posted was a public email address, O'Reilly characterized those who would do such a thing as "zombies."

Thanks to the posters at Democratic Underground for alerting us to the latest chapter in this shameful saga. A discussion on this, and the continued unanswered questions concerning the Gannon/Guckert story is linked here.